How do witnesses differ from Tague?
There is no evidence that Tague was struck on the first or third shots. We only have Tague's evidence that he was struck on the second shot.
As far as Tague's recollection of the time between the first and second shots, [Tague said "almost five seconds... maybe four seconds" between the first and second shots?]. That fits with what many other witnesses recalled:
- Robert Jackson: "3 or 4 seconds between the first and the second, and between the second and third, well, I guess 2 seconds, they were very close together. It could have been more time between the first and second. I really can't be sure."
- Earl Cabell: "There was a longer pause between the first and second shots than there was between the second and third shots. They were in rather rapid succession"
- Lady-Bird Johnson: "We were rounding a curve, going down a hill, and suddenly there was a sharp loud report--a shot. It seemed to me to come from the right, above my shoulder, from a building. Then a moment and then two more shots in rapid succession"
- Luke Mooney: "The second and third shot was pretty close together, but there was a short lapse there between the first and second shot".
- Bonnie Ray Williams: "The first shot--there was two shots rather close together. The second and the third shot was closer together than the first shot and the second shot, as I remember."
- Senator Ralph Yarborough: "After what I took to be about three seconds, another shot boomed out, and after what I took to be one-half the time between the first and second shots (calculated now, this would have put the third shot about one and one-half seconds after the second shot--by my estimate--to me there seemed to be a long time between the first and second shots, a much shorter time between the second and third shots"
- SA Winston Lawson: "There was one report, and a pause, then two more reports closer together, two and three were closer together than one and two".
- Reporter Robert MacNeil: "And there was a bang and we said: “What was that? Was that a shot? Was that a backfire?” And there was time for us to exchange. And then were two shots close together bang bang"
Yes. Witness evidence can vary. That is why one looks at ALL the evidence before rejecting evidence. In the case of the shot spacing, however, the witnesses overwhelmingly recalled that the space between shots 2 and 3 was rapid and there was a long pause after the first before the second. I counted 48 such witnesses. I also found 10 who thought the shots were evenly spaced and 6 who thought the first two were closer together and a few who remembered that two were closer together but could not remember whether it was the first two or last two.
Tague vacillated over the years about being hit at shot two or shot three. I think near the end he did settle in that it was probably shot three.
I’d like to touch base on the debate over shot spacing. I think the shot spacing issue from testimony is interesting and could use more study to explain why there was a lot of testimony suggesting a compressed time for the last two shots.
The timing studies/estimates I have done indicate the shots were triggered at about z124, z219, z310. They were roughly equally spaced about 5 seconds apart. These times were based mostly on the forensics of film evaluation, considering both voluntary and involuntary human reactions, but not based on testimony. I am confident in the shot timing as estimated based on human reactions and prefer not to use witness testimony.
Separate from the conflicting analysis I get when not using witness testimony, there are a couple other reasons I have not been sold on the claim of an actual compressed time between shot 2 and 3 vs 1 and 2.
1) There is a lot of testimony contrary to the shot 2 to 3 time compression vs 1 to 2.
- I haven’t done a survey on this topic, but the general feeling I got when listening to witnesses in person on video recently when doing some general witness reviews is that there are nearly as many that think the spacing was about equal vs compressed.
The most recent ones I recall are that Karen Westbrook Scranton recalled two shots, lull, then one shot, which is the opposite of later time compression. Dave Wiegman had a very intense memory of the shots being equally spaced. Malcome Kilduff recalled the shots sounded precisely/exactly alike and Pierce Allman said three well space reverberating shots. Hugh Aynesworth first thought a motorcycle backfire, but it wasn’t, that was the first shot, then soon, a few seconds the second shot and then a third. He did not say unequal spacing but the shots were spaced fairly close together.
- A researcher on another forum had done some research in Dallas awhile back and met a group of people with Mary Ferrell which comprised some Daltex workers from Nov 22 63 and they met for coffee…ladies, about 6 of them who were watching from the second floor and they all said the shots were about even. He also met ~23 witnesses and did not recall anyone saying the shots were bunched.
- One witness, Faye Chism, saw a spray, like sparks, shoot up from the pavement about midway up the side of the limo by JFK during the first shot but did think the last two sounds after that were closer together.
Net, I am not sure what the true ratio is for witnesses of equal spacing vs compressed spacing for the last two shots.
2) Nearly everybody changed their testimony which might give a clue as to how time perception may have changed during the last two shots. This dynamic should probably get more attention as recent studies indicate anxiety can make people underestimate how much time actually passes. I wonder if this may have played a role in the perceived time estimation between shots 2 and 3.
- Nearly everyone that afternoon reported they heard an initial loud bang, some had a concern at that point but many were just annoyed and wanted to know what the hell it was. Many thought it was a firecracker, but most soon realized it was followed by two shots. So technically their testimony initially was (firecracker, shot, shot). I don’t know of anyone who later on still maintained that initial perception of (firecracker, shot, shot) so everyone based on what they were told, or individually figured out, changed their testimony to (shot, shot, shot) i.e. three shots.
All the changing of testimony doesn’t make one feel warm and fuzzy, but in this case is probably justified and might shed light on how they perceived the spacing between the last two noises (two shots) vs the spacing between first two noises (a firecracker and a shot).
On the Zapruder film it seems that most of the ducking to the ground happened after the third shot, and that is when fear really set in. Between shot two and three was a transition to anxiety as the realization set in of gunshots going off around them, not firecrackers. Uncertainty and anxiety are believed to play a role in the perception of time passage.
A study at the Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience at University College London was designed to understand the effect anxiety and fear have on how we perceive time.
The researchers found that when people feel anxious, they underestimate how much time passes. In other words, anxiety makes time pass quicker. On the other hand, some people tend to slightly overestimate it when they feel afraid.
Could this mean 5 actual seconds between shots 2 and 3 was perceived by some to be like 2 or 3 seconds?
